UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Eggleston, Christenberry, Divola: Color Photography Beyond the New York Reception A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Art History by Reva Leigh Main June 2016 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Susan Laxton, Chairperson Dr. Jason Weems Dr. Liz Kotz Copyright by Reva Leigh Main 2016 The Dissertation of Reva Main is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgments My deepest gratitude to all the U.C. Riverside Art History Department staff and faculty. Sincere thanks to Dr. Susan Laxton for advising and encouraging me throughout the many phases of this project. Your patience and support allowed me to complete this thesis while living 3,000 miles away and working full time—a true challenge. I would also like to thank Dr. Jason Weems and Dr. Liz Kotz for serving as members of my committee, pausing their own sabbaticals to provide me with incredibly helpful feedback; Leigh Gleason, Curator of Collections at the California Museum of Photography, for guiding me in my search to find balance between work and school; and Graduate Coordinator, Alesha Jaennette, for solving my many paperwork crises. I am forever grateful to all of you for your flexibility and understanding. Finally, thank you to my family, friends, and Princeton University Art Museum coworkers for sticking with me through the highs and many lows of this process. Your love and support helped me push through and see this project to completion. iv ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS Eggleston, Christenberry, Divola: Color Photography Beyond the New York Reception by Reva Leigh Main Master of Arts, Graduate Program in Art History University of California, Riverside, June 2016 Dr. Susan Laxton, Chairperson This thesis will examine the history of color photography in America, with specific attention to the exhibition and review of color photography across the country in the 1970s. The first chapter looks at recent exhibitions and texts on the topic, identifying their common shortcomings as the focus on the exhibition and review of color photography in New York City in the 1970s, and the use of New York exhibition and review of color photo as a stand-in for understandings of color photography throughout America. Through a series of case studies, namely, William Eggleston in New York, William Christenberry in Washington D.C., and John Divola in Los Angeles, this thesis reevaluates the significance of Eggleston’s 1976 MoMA exhibition and offers examples of color’s acceptance and embrace by institutions and critics prior to 1976 outside the New York context. v Table of Contents Acknowledgment .................................................................................................... iv Abstract ..........................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ......................................................................................................... vii Introduction ................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Understandings Color Photography after New Color ..................................7 Chapter 2: William Eggleston and New York City ......................................................60 Chapter 3: William Christenberry and Washington D.C. ...........................................98 Chapter 4: John Divola and Los Angeles ..................................................................136 Conclusion ................................................................................................................162 Figures ........................................................................................................................163 Bibliography ............................................................................................................171 vi List of Figures Figure 1: William Eggleston, Untitled, from Los Alamos, 1965-68 ...................................................... 163 ©Eggleston Artistic Trust, Figure 2: William Eggleston's Guide, 1976 ............................................................................................. 164 ©Eggleston Artistic Trust Figure 3: William Eggleston, Black Bayou, near Glendora, Mississippi, n.d., ..................................... 164 ©Eggleston Artistic Trust Figure 4: William Christenberry, Tenant House, Havana, Alabama, 1961 .......................................... 165 ©William Christenberry Figure 5: William Christenberry, Tenant House, 1960 .......................................................................... 165 ©William Christenberry Figure 6: Walker Evans, Elizabeth Tengle, Let Us Now Praise Famous Men, 1936 ............................. 166 Figure 7: William Christenberry, Elisabeth Tingle at Tingle House on Mill’s Hill, 1962. ................... 166 ©William Christenberry Figure 8: William Christenberry, Double Cola Sign, Beale Street, Memphis, TN, 1966 ...................... 167 ©William Christenberry Figure 9: William Christenberry, 31 Cent Gasoline Sign, Near Greensboro, Alabama, 1964 ............ 167 ©William Christenberry Figures 10: John Divola, LAX NAX, House Removals, 1976 .................................................................. 168 ©John Divola Figure 11: John Divola, Vandalism Series, 1973-1975 ............................................................................ 168 ©John Divola Figures 12: John Divola, Vandalism Series, 1973-1975 .......................................................................... 169 ©John Divola Figures 13: John Divola, Zuma #41, 1977 ................................................................................................ 170 ©John Divola Figures 14: John Divola, Zuma #4, 1978 .................................................................................................. 170 ©John Divola vii Introduction Color photography appears to be having a moment. This is not to say that prior to now color photography has been discounted or ignored, but rather that the recent uptick in programs and publications directly addressing color photography reveals a sense of urgency around reassessing the medium’s historical and material development in greater detail. In the past six years, three separate large scale exhibitions focused specifically on redressing the history of color photography in America were mounted in the United States, each accompanied by in-depth catalogs. In addition to these presentations, the Getty Conservation Institute published not one, but two manuals on the history of color photographic technologies and the identification and care of color plates, slides, and prints.1 The questions of how we understand the history of American color photography in the present and how we can preserve analog color photographic materials for study in the future seem to be buzzing in the air. The current interest in writing the history of color photography is not surprising considering analog color technologies are disappearing at an increasingly rapid pace.2 On June 22, 2009, Kodak announced it would cease manufacturing Kodachrome, a film that had been on the market since 1935 and had monumental impact on the use of color photography. The decision to discontinue the product was based on increasingly dismal sales. As reported in Kodak’s discontinuation notice, “Kodachrome currently represents a 1 Please see: Sylvie Pénichon, Twentieth-century Color Photographs: Identification and Care (Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute, 2013) and Bertrand Lavédrine et al., The Lumière Autochrome: History, Technology, and Preservation (Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute, 2013). 2 A fact touched upon by Kate Bussard and Lisa Hostetler in their preface to Color Rush and John Rohrbach in his introduction to Color! American Photography Transformed. 1 fraction of 1% of Kodak’s still film sales.3 While Kodachrome is an truly iconic product that has served photographers very well for 74 years, the simple truth is that people have moved on and are no longer purchasing it in sustainable volumes.”4 And it is undeniable: photographers and companies are moving on. The equipment and chemicals needed to shoot and print color photography are vanishing from the market, going the way of Kodachrome. Labs for developing color film are being downsized or packed up altogether. Universities and community centers are cutting their analog color photo courses and eliminating darkrooms due to the cost of materials and upkeep of studio spaces. Many artists who established their careers using color film have transitioned to digital shooting and/or printing because the technologies have improved greatly, and digital processes allow more flexibility.5 It seems only natural that in this 3 As per Kodachrome’s discontinuation notice: “Although Kodachrome has very distinct characteristics and no film will give the exact same results, current users are encouraged to try other Kodak films. Kodak continues to bring innovative new film products to market, having released seven new professional films -- over the last three years alone.” Alternatives to color films suggested by Kodak included: Kodak Professional Portra 160 NC and VC Film, Kodak Professional Portra 400 NC and VC Films, Kodak Professional Portra 800 Film, Kodak Professional T-MAX 400 Film, Kodak